We assume the President can do something about the "corporate takeover"...

[kentuck]

However, it may be beyond the reach of the President or the present Congress to do anything about it. The disease has mestasized and moved to all parts of the body. It cannot be cured. It has to be totally removed.

The President understands that he could cross the line and end up like JFK or Lincoln. That is the reality. He is walking a fine line by simply criticizing these "corporations". They mean to bring him down. If they have to bring down the country in order to do that, then so be it.

The Preamble says We, the People, not We, the Corporations. But that is what has happened by lack of vigilance and deceit and partisan lies. We have permitted ourselves and our country to be controlled by forces not in the interests of the American people. It was a long process but they were able to bribe and to buy our legislators. That is where we are today.

The President, if he cannot move his Party to act, is powerless. He has tried compromise. He has surrendered the high ground on many issues. He has made some progress. But nowhere near enough to take back the government for the People.

[blindpig]

1. He knew the deal when he 'signed up',

as does every candidate that makes it to the 'semi-finals'.

This ain't nothing new, it is a matter of the historical development of Capitalism. Capital has necessarily become more efficient(at generating profits) and more rapacious as it responds to the boom and bust cycles which it inevitably generates. There is no living with it, except for the capilalists.

[SargeUNN]

9. Yep and we should have too

I talked about it on air during the campaign as did other progressive voices that if we don't make sure we get people in office that will work with and steer this president in the right way we will be taken over by corporations. I even questioned if we had gone too far into corportism that any president be it Washington, Lincoln, the Roosevelts could turn it around. This should motivate us to work with president and realize the alternative is the Republicans.

[Barack2theFuture]

2. nobody gets to fire their boss.

[kentuck]

3. What do you mean ??

Who's the boss?

[blindpig]

4. The boss:

[Barack2theFuture]

5. blindpig said it best first

Capitalism rules.

The government does what they are told.

Within very narrow bounds, Obama can posture against capitalism if it helps him politically, but he certainly can't change anything.

[Edweird]

6. Just like FDR was totally helpless as well.....

[kentuck]

7. FDR did not have a legislature as bought off as this one.

I do not believe.

[Edweird]

13. There was literally a coup plotted against him and he did not back down.

[deutsey]

17. A big difference between now and 1933

is there were strong and very active social movements when FDR came into office, ones that had been agitating for change for a few decades. FDR could draw from that power when going up against the "economic royalists."

There are no such movements today.

[Fire1]

8. I'm glad to see this is finally resonating with some people. n/t

[Xolodno]

10. Finally got arround to Michael Moore's movie...

about capitalism.

His other ones really did not resonate with me....but this, hit the ball out of the park.

But one thing that stuck with me was the memo about being a plutocracy and the only obstacle to this was the voting power of the people. I don't think Mr. Moore fully saw the relevance in this.

They, the corporate elite, saw this as a problem and are working to circumvent it. Much like corporate voting, owning a few "shares" gives you a right to vote, but are pretty much worthless. Due to the corporations position of keeping "raiders" and "hostile takeovers" for the most part at bay, they also have restricted the legitimate investors from being able to "fire" inept management or keep them from using a system of rewarding immediate friends. Thus now they are trying to do the same with everyone's voting power. And thus far...are succeeding.

[spanone]

11. i assume because of the 'corporate takeover' the President can't do shit

congress is bought and paid for by corporate america, they have no incentive to do anything to curb corporatism

[Xolodno]

12. Of course he can't do anything....

We know the mechanics of how the economic collapse occurred...but we don't know is the trigger that set it all off. What I can't understand is, why this all happened at once, if the bank knows that if it resets all the mortgages in a given class that they will get an almost all them defaulting...why do it? That would guarantee insolvency. At the risk of sounding conspiratorial...

How do we know the economic meltdown was not intentional? A sort of economic hostage of sorts, to get anyone thinking they could usurp them (corporate elite) by anyone in government, that they (corporate elite) hold all the cards.

They would have made their money and bailed on the country if the government did not bail them out. The government would have essentially collapsed from the economic fallout...and they would return all to happy to "give a helping hand" and install a more corporate friendly government (under a populist guise). If they did bail them out, then the current politicians got to keep their jobs (and possibly saved their lives).

We already know that a large enough segment of the populace can and does vote against its best interest, so they have the propaganda war tied up pretty well. Next, the real reason the troops can't come up is, once they come back, there will be no jobs for them. Hungry troops don't support the current government very well. So they will be in flux somewhere until economy stabilizes from being a hostage. Thereby, keeping them occupied and prevents a trained army from overthrowing anyone domestic.

[Greyhound]

14. He devoted his life to getting the chance to sit in The Big Chair.

Now we're supposed to "understand" that he doesn't want to do the job and support his inaction.

The President does have a great deal of power, especially over the rank & file of government workers, and like Roosevelt's Bully Pulpit he simply refuses to use it to help us.

[Poboy]

15. What a pathetic cop-out. Represent the PEOPLE or GTFOut! -nt

[bigtree]

16. he was really specifically addressing the matter of corporations contributing unlimited money

. . .to campaigns for advertising, assuming that they should be treated by campaign law as individuals.

He really wasn't addressing corporate influence in government in general, although his administration did take some steps early on to limit that influence (albeit with a few notable exceptions in his leadership team).

[Marr]

18. You're waiting for Ronald McDonald to tell us how unhealthy the hamburgers are.

The reason Obama hasn't taken a stand against creeping corporate power isn't because he's afraid of ending up like JFK-- it's because that's his team.

Yes, you get a very occasional, lukewarm comment on the subject during election season, but that's it. That's politics. If Obama wanted to, he could speak very plainly on the subject like FDR. He could name names. He could mobilize huge support from the general population in no time, and neuter the fatcats in any way he wanted. He does not want to.